OBJECTIVETo provide appropriate guidelines for treatment of tandem ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) and flaval ligament (OFL). Data sources Published articles about OPLL and OFL were selected using Medline and Embase electronic databases. Study selection An English literature search from January 1980 to December 2006 was conducted. Because many reported cases were incorporated in OFL studies, the key words for search were OFL or OFL and OPLL. The first step revealed 93 studies of which 13 reports of tandem OPLL and OFL (tandem ossification) were selected.

RESULTSAll studies were case series or case report and advocated that the primary therapy for tandem ossification should be operative. The clinical outcomes of surgery were evaluated in most reports, predominantly using the JOA scores. Gender is the only factor which has prognostic value. A higher proportion of women was found in the failure group. A two-stage classification of tandem ossification was developed to relate diagnosis to outcome.

CONCLUSIONSAll patients with suspected ossification of the spinal ligaments should undergo routine MRI screening of the whole spine. The correlation of the classification with surgical treatments needs further studies to validate its usefulness.

Female ; Humans ; Ligamentum Flavum ; pathology ; Male ; Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament ; classification ; pathology ; Ossification, Heterotopic ; classification ; pathology

Methods: This study included 60 patients with Lenke 1 AIS who underwent selective thoracic fusion surgery. Coronal spinal alignment parameters were analyzed preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the final follow-up. The postoperative FMS was divided into two groups: the balanced group (FMS ≤20 mm) and the unbalanced group (FMS >20 mm). An independent t-test was used to compare quantitative data between groups, and a chi-square test was used for qualitative data. Furthermore, binary logistic regression and receiver operating characteristics curve analyses were used to identify the risk factors for postoperative distal adding-on in AIS. Results: At 2-year follow-up, the unbalanced group was more likely to have adding-on (17 of 24 patients) than the balanced group (six of 36 patients; p<0.001). Twenty-three patients with distal adding-on had significantly greater preoperative and postoperative lower instrumented vertebrae (LIV) rotation, FMS, and FMS angle (FMSA) than those without postoperative distal adding-on. Binary logistic regression analysis selected three independent risk factors for adding-on incidence after surgery: FMS (odds ratio [OR], 1.115; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.049–1.185; p<0.001), FMSA (OR, 1.590; 95% CI, 1.225–2.064; p<0.001), and postoperative LIV rotation (OR, 6.581; 95% CI, 2.280–19.000; p<0.001). Conclusions Achieving a balanced fusion mass intraoperatively is important to avoid postoperative distal adding-on, with FMS of <20 mm and FMS angle of <4.5°. Furthermore, correcting LIV rotation helps to decrease the incidence of postoperative distal addingon.